|
Observation and Perspective
|
| Ride Stats |
|
Distance:
10.57 miles
|
Time: 01:09:00
|
Max Speed:
30.00 mph
|
|
Avg Speed:
9.19 mph
|
Temp:
Avg: 45
|
Category: general: leisure -
solo
|
|
Route:
(ATB)Hill & Towpath
|
Weight:
235
|
Altitude Gain:
0 ft
|
|
Avg Power: 0 W
|
Calories Burned: 700
|
Avg HR: 0 bpm
|
|
Terrain: Road: Flat
|
Bike: Bianchi 32lb-Castro Valley Road
|
Club: USA Towpath and Trail Riders association |
| Weather Conditions: Overcast, light rain, light Westerly winds; |
|
It has been entertaining reading the thoughts of other riders. I appreciate every critical assessment and suggestion. Certainly there are more complicated ways of quantifying effort: estimating watts generated, measuring average heart rate etc... Even speed, distance, and time are all the basic factors of evaluating effort. My calculation renders quantifiable comparable data for any ride or rider.
I note that many cycling personalities are perhaps more competitive than average non-cyclists. So in an instance when someone shares a concept as simple as "W-D effort", there may be seen a need to dismiss the idea. Bragging rights often enter into a cyclists performance effort. Acquiring the latest, greatest, newest electronics, mechanicals, or fashion of tomorrow. That alloy, titanium, carbon, ceramic this or that Doesn't make us better people. I think sharing ideas is more what it's all about. So if my method of quantifying effort suits you or doesn't -good,!!
The point of tracking an Weight-distance effort statistic is to enable the rider to quantify the weight factor in consistent way.
With the W-D calculation, a rider is able to track a number which represents how weight influences effort. If there is no disagreement with that point, then what does it matter what numerical value represents the weight effort relationship? So long as the value is consistent in relation to moving weight and comparable from ride to ride this is a useful representation of effort affected by weight!
Is the debate here that the weight of an object does not play a significant role in the amount of effort required to move that object? I would have to disagree with that point!
Can't we agree that more effort is required to move heavier weights rather than light weights in real world situations? My point is that weight is absolutely a factor in cycling performance. There are other indirect ways to quantify the effect of weight on effort. The W-D statistic is a direct way to quantify the effect of weight on effort.
The initial goal with this calculation was to derive an effort stat without extraneous equipment like HR monitor or watt computer hub. Additionally an important issue with coming up with a numerical value for the effort stat. is consistent, comparative results derived from a simple calculation based on the ride values.
After some consideration, it seems to me that Howard's suggestion of adding a "per hour" reference is unnecessary. The W-D statistic itself has no point of reference comparable to speed, other than the indication of moving a weight a specific distance in a specific amount of time, requires effort. IF quantifying the numerical value with an additional "per hour" reference is preferred, one only has to multiply the Weight-Distance statistic by the ride hours. I think it an unnecessary additional step to arrive at a value no more representative of the "W-D effort" than the value derived through the basic calculation: Weight x Distance ÷ Time in minutes;
The W-D statistic is only a representation of effort. The value of using the statistic is that it represents the differences in effort from ride to ride and rider to rider based on weight. Any interpretation beyond a simple Weight-Distance effort statistic seems to be of questionable value!
9 member views | 6450 total views
report problem |
|
|
|
| My Recent Threads |
11/25 - Ebikes
11/11 - Trouble Renewing membership
12/22 - Status listing is inorrect
|
|
more...
